There seems to be a deep polarization among us technical users about Windows 8. The only thing we can almost all agree on is that Windows 8 wasn't made for the enterprise and simply won't work there (for the majority). The general consensus among us has been that Microsoft will correct this with Windows 9 and this would have fallen in line with businesses typical upgrade cycle (they adopted XP, skipped Vista, adopted 7, and are expected to skip 8 to adopt 9). The email I got from the WSJ this morning eludes that MS may have killed Windows 9 for the enterprise before it even ships.

Microsoft seems to be in a very dangerous position here. They are running the risk of putting all of their eggs into the consumer basket and they really don't have any experience depending on them as their primary customer.

Good morning. Microsoft's pricing schemes could be the last straw for many CIOs. The newest twist to the company’s convoluted licensing plans means customers will pay more when users access software from several devices, such as desktops at work and tablets from home. The pricing changes are tantamount to "water torture," Forrester Research analyst Mark Bartrick tells CIO Journal.But even most prisoners of war eventually get released. “We’re not going to be doing that in 2016,” said Stephen Fraser, CIO of Danish conglomerate Moller Maersk, which at around $55.7 billion in annual revenues and 108,000 employees, is one of the largest companies in the world and exactly the kind of company Microsoft can’t afford to lose. It’s also the kind of company other customers look to as an example. Fraser told CIO Journal that attempts by software vendors to trap customers with enterprise license agreements is part of what’s driving him and other CIOs to consider alternatives to the likes of Microsoft, including cloud computing and open source applications. “What do you need Microsoft for?” he said.

Source: The Wall Street Journal - Morning CIO EMail

The crux of the problem is Microsoft is moving from charging companies per device for their licenses and are moving to charging them per user. Meaning they will have to pay more for devices shared by many employees and can end up paying multiple times for the same license (such as paying for Windows Phone in the phone purchase then again when an employee uses it). Microsoft seems to be trying to "tax" companies on all of their employees no matter how casual their computer use.

Looking at the way the whole Win8 discussions here for example, I'm inclined to agree with you, I guess I'm in the win8 hater category, so I could be biased, but the 2nd and 3rd time I went back to my PC World, to be demonstrated Win8 I found myself more impatient with the OS
(the only thing I took away from the whole experience was 'guess it's not for me then')

Interesting read but I'm not sure they'll be consigned to the "recycle bin of history"; their board of directors would probably remove Steve Ballmer before that happens. I think most businesses will bypass Windows 8 and stick with Win7 since it is satisfactory for their needs (the same will be true for many home users I'm sure).

Interesting read but I'm not sure they'll be consigned to the "recycle bin of history"; their board of directors would probably remove Steve Ballmer before that happens. I think most businesses will bypass Windows 8 and stick with Win7 since it is satisfactory for their needs (the same will be true for many home users I'm sure).

A lot of businesses would have to upgrade to Win7 first in order to stick with it.

I love Windows 7...but a ton of companies have yet to still upgrade due to how most enterprise upgrade cycles work. Odds are the rest will start rolling out 7 soon enough...and 8 will start seeing heavier deployment within the next 24-months. That's typically how the cycles work.

Was just speaking to that consumer gambit in another thread. I think there is certainly some merit there. One other constant I've noted is that MS seems content to alienate professionals/decision makers to make that consumer push. The perceived greed of this push to consumerization is what I find the most appalling. Its making long time MS proponents start re-evaluating if this is the horse we want to be hitched to if it goes off the rails.

Fraser told CIO Journal that attempts by software vendors to trap customers with enterprise license agreements is part of what’s driving him and other CIOs to consider alternatives to the likes of Microsoft, including cloud computing and open source applications. “What do you need Microsoft for?” he said.

There seems to be a deep polarization among us technical users about Windows 8. The only thing we can almost all agree on is that Windows 8 wasn't made for the enterprise and simply won't work there (for the majority). The general consensus among us has been that Microsoft will correct this with Windows 9 and this would have fallen in line with businesses typical upgrade cycle (they adopted XP, skipped Vista, adopted 7, and are expected to skip 8 to adopt 9). The email I got from the WSJ this morning eludes that MS may have killed Windows 9 for the enterprise before it even ships.

Microsoft seems to be in a very dangerous position here. They are running the risk of putting all of their eggs into the consumer basket and they really don't have any experience depending on them as their primary customer.

Source: The Wall Street Journal - Morning CIO EMail

The crux of the problem is Microsoft is moving from charging companies per device for their licenses and are moving to charging them per user. Meaning they will have to pay more for devices shared by many employees and can end up paying multiple times for the same license (such as paying for Windows Phone in the phone purchase then again when an employee uses it). Microsoft seems to be trying to "tax" companies on all of their employees no matter how casual their computer use.

Uh...jumping the gun are we? Combine this with the free OS updates FPN - and it kind of makes sense?

I would guess that there are similar reactions with every licensing change (remember Vmware with their ESX5 mess?) and Microsoft can quickly backtrack if things don't work out. People are really desperate to paint a doom and gloom for Microsoft, it's getting ridiculous.

I'm glad I can't see the original post for this thread...the thread title was enough for me to figure out it's a hit piece without merit.

How does per user pricing not have merit?

Or is this being interpreted as another Anti-Windows 8 thread. As it isn't one...

Uh...jumping the gun are we? Combine this with the free OS updates FPN - and it kind of makes sense?

I would guess that there are similar reactions with every licensing change (remember Vmware with their ESX5 mess?) and Microsoft can quickly backtrack if things don't work out. People are really desperate to paint a doom and gloom for Microsoft, it's getting ridiculous.

For large enterprises this update story is nothing new. They have had "free upgrades" since 2006 (so Windows XP era) via Software Assurance licensing.

Why would it? In 5 years we would have Windows 10. I'd imagine things added in Windows 8 would be carried into 9 and 10, but there would be refinements made.

It would be similar to how almost every techie agrees that Windows XP SP0 was crap and MS bucking their historical stance and adding features in XP SP2 made it into a very long lasting and well regarded OS. Opinions on 8 are varied, but it is hard to argue that whatever MS intended to accomplish the OS right now is incomplete.

That being said, this thread really is about the new licensing structure that threatens their enterprise business more so than Windows 8 directly.